The “fix” is not in
Okay, good news: according to The Barack, the problems with the Obamacare website have been fixed. Not only that, they did it at the lightning speed of the federal government and had it taken care of within a “Month-and-a-half”. Wow, I’m impressed. Or maybe a better term would be saddened. Since when has six weeks been an acceptable amount of time to fix a problem with a website? I remember just around Christmas when Target was maliciously hacked and had a bunch of information stolen. They (Target) were pilloried in the press, and as it happens, by government officials who cast aspersions on Target’s internet security. Wow, Target gets trashed for being penetrated by skilled, determined hackers but the federal government takes six weeks to “fix” a website they mis-spent three years, and six hundred million dollars, creating and they’re “on the ball”? Really?But wait! It gets better (or worse depending on how you define it)! Not only has the Obama Administration wasted too much time and money on not building a website, but I have to wonder if The Barack’s definition of “fixed” quite lines up with what normal people think of as "fixed". To me, when something is fixed, it works like it should, not just better than it did when it didn’t function at all. Let’s take an automobile for instance. If I take my car to a mechanic because it won’t run, and I get it back with the radio working correctly, but nothing else repaired, I’m probably not going to agree that it’s fixed. Granted, now I will have something to amuse me while I’m waiting for a tow truck, but since I probably had in mind being able to drive my car/truck, with a functioning radio, by the way, I’m probably going to insist that the rest of the repairs get taken care of. Particularly if I had to pay for all of the repairs before the mechanic went to work on it in the first place. Then again, seeing that the Barack's car people have trouble with something as simple as what kind of fuel his limo runs on (it's diesel and they filled it with gas when he visited Israel), maybe he really doesn't quite understand that fixed means it works like it's supposed to. For all I know, when Barack Obama wants to go somewhere part of his preparation is to find out if the car currently runs. Maybe that's why Air Force One and Marine One get so much use these days. Maybe it's not so much that he and Michelle like to fly around as it is they can't drive because the limo mechanic uses the federal government definition of fixed and their car only runs a random twenty percent of the time.That’s how I see it with the Obamacare website. We, the American people, paid a lot of money for a website that didn’t work, and now the administration has slapped a couple of patches on it and told us everything is okay. I remember thinking that when Target was hacked the press and the government sure spent a lot of time blaming Target, while at the same time how easily the Obamacare website could be, and had been, hacked was downplayed. I heard a lot about how Target had dropped the ball, and put the personal information of millions of people at risk. At the same time I noted that very little was said about hunting down the hackers and punishing them. Target was blamed for being hacked by anonymous hackers while we knew where the people who made healthcare.gov, or whatever the site name of Obamacare is, so susceptible to being hacked, or spoofed, were to be found. Easy to blame a private sector business, but to call for the heads of whoever's responsible for the Obamacare security debacle would lead right back to the top of the federal government. Somehow, I suspect that any investigations into the lack of proper security at healthcare.gov won't go very far. They'll probably be handled by Joe Biden or possibly Eric Holder after he gets finished looking into the Fast and Furious scandal. By the way, when, pray tell, can we expect the final report on Fast and Furious?Okay, the healthcare.gov disaster was three years and six hundred million dollars in the (not) making. Not only that, but despite what the administration says about it, I don't really think it can be said to be "working" in the sense that it does what it's supposed to do. Say, you don't suppose somebody charged us to "fix" the website do you? I mean we just spent a ton of money on it and I know when I spend a lot of money on something, I'm not willing to spend more money to fix it the day it's delivered. Oh well, another investigation for Holder, or Biden.Anyway, at least partially, the healthcare.gov debacle is a red herring. When we're allowing ourselves to get all worked up about how poorly it was handled, that takes a lot of attention away from Obamacare itself. In part, spending more time on the healthcare.gov non website than it deserves (don't get me wrong, spending six hundred million dollars and just getting a non-working security risk does indeed need some "looking into") at least partially cedes legitimacy to Obamacare itself.I'm all for hammering anybody and everybody who had anything to do with the creation of healthcare.gov, but face it, in reality it's just one more dysfunctional government website and there's no shortage of those. The important part of the whole thing isn't that healthcare.gov is a bust, heck that's not even a surprise, but rather that the government is taking over healthcare. Do you want to do away with the website and punish the people who created it? Great, so do I. Additionally I'd like a six hundred million dollar refund. That's all a good idea, but instead of being a goal, it needs to be the first step in the journey that does away with Obamacare entirely. Too late you say? Well, that's only true if we let it happen. For the people out there who still think that Obamacare itself is a good idea, I would like to remind you of a couple of other things the federal government has taken upon itself, toilets and light bulbs. The federal government took two things that worked well, and were important to our culture, and decided that they could be improved by government intervention. Both of these things (incandescent light bulbs and flush toilets) are things that were technologically conquered over a hundred years ago. Over the years, there were minor improvements in style and function, but basically, they existed pretty much as first invented, until the federal government decided they could "do better". Now we have a lot of toilets that don't work very well (along with sewer systems that stop up more frequently than they should). On top of that, the federal government is phasing out incandescent light bulbs because they are supposedly environmentally unfriendly, but they're mandating the replacement of these bulbs with new ones that contain mercury. Sorry, I'm hard pressed to understand how a bulb that contains mercury is more environmentally friendly than anything, much less an incandescent light bulb.Getting worked up about healthcare.gov is great, but don't let it make you forget that the same entity who has screwed up the flush toilet, incandescent light bulbs, runs the IR$, Department of Education, Department of Energy, EPA, etc. wants to bring that same level of efficiency to your healthcare. Personally, I think stopping that is worth some of our time and attention.Bruce Kreitler is the author of Obamageddon (the Culmination of the Progressive Looting of America) and posts this and other articles at BruceKreitler.com.